Did technology transfer more rapidly East–West than North–South?

Jamie Bologna Pavlik and Andrew T. Young

European Economic Review, 2019, vol. 119, issue C, 216-235

Abstract: We offer evidence of the role of continental orientation in the historical diffusion of technologies. Diamond (1997) argued that technologies spread more slowly North–South (N–S) than East–West (E–W) for two reasons. First, it was relatively costly for individuals to transport innovations when experiencing N–S variations in climate. Second, some innovations (e.g., selectively bred seeds) would have been less likely to survive N–S movements. Continents with E–W orientation, then, were characterized by less costly and/or more successful sharing of technologies. We employ Comin’s et al. (2010) data on ancient and early modern levels of technology adoption in a spatial econometric analysis. Historical levels of technology adoption in a (present-day) country are related to its lagged level as well as those of its neighbors. The E–W spatial correlations are generally larger, more likely to be positive, and more likely to be statistically significant. While acknowledging that the difference between E–W and N–S effects is not significant in every estimation, taken together the results offer compelling support for the Diamond hypothesis.

Keywords: Continental orientation; Technological diffusion; Deep roots; Economic development; Spatial econometrics (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O10 O30 O33 O47 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0014292119301254
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:eecrev:v:119:y:2019:i:c:p:216-235

DOI: 10.1016/j.euroecorev.2019.07.006

Access Statistics for this article

European Economic Review is currently edited by T.S. Eicher, A. Imrohoroglu, E. Leeper, J. Oechssler and M. Pesendorfer

More articles in European Economic Review from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().